Rich countries spend billion of dollars to provide humanitarian to the poor countries without knowing the fact that it is not going to solve the poverty related problems. According to some experts , rich countries should provide some other helps to the people rather than funding the government authorities. I completely agree with the statement and have given my reasons for it in the forthcoming paragraphs.
Predominantly , this funding is not effective in achieving the results they are intended to achieve because corruption is prevalent in poor countries. Corrupt authorities invest only a tiny part of this charity in resolving the problems faced by the people due to lack of financial sources and deposit its major part into their own bank accounts. This incorrect usage of money could solve the problem temporarily. For example, a newspaper report, last month, confirmed that the condition of people of the poor countries is still miserable even after getting a huge amount of charity from many financially strong communities, whereas, the officials of the same country were found to have a huge money in their account. Thus, this money is not used effectively by the seniors of the poor countries.
In order to solve such problem, rich countries should help the people of the miserable country by investing their money in some other ways. For example, investment in national education should be done rather than depositing the money into the government's poverty policy. This will help the poor children to learn the basic knowledge and skills for their better future, which automatically will be beneficial for the country's future. Moreover, they should provide employment to the skilled labour so as to help them earn their livelihood.
In conclusion, rich countries should invest their money for the betterment of the people and not the government.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 22, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
Rich countries spend billion of dollars to provide humanitarian to t...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 197, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ated problems. According to some experts , rich countries should provide some othe...
^^
Line 2, column 14, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...e forthcoming paragraphs. Predominantly , this funding is not effective in achiev...
^^
Line 2, column 687, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'huge money'.
Suggestion: huge money
... of the same country were found to have a huge money in their account. Thus, this money is n...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 243, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
...ther than depositing the money into the governments poverty policy. This will help the poor...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 496, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...rovide employment to the skilled labour so as to help them earn their livelihood. In co...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
moreover, so, still, thus, whereas, as to, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1563.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 299.0 315.596192385 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22742474916 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77328056413 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 176.041082164 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541806020067 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 471.6 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.1939218852 49.4020404114 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.230769231 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30769230769 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.01903807615 120% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.289600644504 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113511767123 0.084324248473 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0800306382461 0.0667982634062 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198803186785 0.151304729494 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0463265788829 0.056905535591 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.